I haven't seen it-though I intend to do so. I am surprised that, contrary to the firestorm of protest against Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ," the usual suspects (ADL, AJC, B'nai B'rith) have been apparently silent about SOG. Does that mean that Christ has been portrayed in a bland manner?

Kingsman wrote:I haven't seen it-though I intend to do so. I am surprised that, contrary to the firestorm of protest against Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ," the usual suspects (ADL, AJC, B'nai B'rith) have been apparently silent about SOG. Does that mean that Christ has been portrayed in a bland manner?

The real answer is that no one famous for anti Jewish rants is behind this one.

Xeno: To attribute the opposition of Jewish groups because of anti-Jewish rants (hint: the attacks came from a much darker place) by Mel Gibson reminds me of the video which caused all that trouble in Benghazi. In any event Mel Gibson profited from the attacks/notoriety as his film racked up $370 million at the box office. I doubt that SOG will come close to that figure but I hope it does well. Mark Burnett seems to be a much better person than Mel Gibson particularly when it comes to presenting the story of Jesus.

I've heard it is a poor to mediocre film... so I changed my mind about seeing it in the theater.

I try to watch Passion of the Christ every year and the more I watch it, the less I like it.I still think it's a stunning film to watch and has a good basis... but so many s l o w m o t i o n scenes stretch it out too much.

The Church is not a hotel for saints. It is a hospital for sinners.St. Augustine